Expand
Collapse

In follow-up comments, both Jaylen Smith and Seth Dawkins acknowledged that their tweets would probably draw attention from someone inside the U of L football program, but that they planned to stand by their opinion.

Expand
Collapse

Just putting some perspective on the absurdity of some of the many things they've swept under the rug over the last decade that neither their fans nor players ever cared about. "They were there for that." Affluent board member says a bad word "we're not here for that." 16 yr old kids getting school sanctioned hookers off the street, its all good. UofL is a joke.

Expand
Collapse

I'm sure I'll catch hell for this, particularly from the SJW's on this board, but this seems like the same BS that is crippling constructive debate and turning us into a nation of whimps more concerned about whether their sensibilities are being honored and protected, regardless of context or intent, than they are about actual substance and dialogue.

From everything I've read on this thing, Shnatter is most certainly not a racist...never once intended to call anyone the "n-word", and was in fact disparaging racist things that he learned in his past.

He had literally set up this conference call to make sure his company learned how to be more sensitive to such things. Even people at the meeting admitted he was decrying terrible racism he knew of from the past. But some on the call got offended that he even uttered the word...never mind it was in the context, not of calling anyone such a thing, but as a quote of what somebody else had said in the past, but not suffered the same attacks he was getting just for blaming the NFL's handling of the "kneeling" BS for negatively impacting his sales.

He gave another example of what used to happen to some black Americans when he was younger. This to emphasize to his team how much things have changed and why it was important to get more training and advice on how to speak publicly.

On top of that....the guy immediately apologizes for even using the word in context because it upset some on the call, and he removes himself as the top exec of his own company, and removes himself from the UofL Board of Trustees, and states publicly how he is opposed to racism, etc.

But that's not good enough. No, the SJW's of the world have to have more blood sacrifice at the alter of their "hurt feelings" or "bruised sensibilities" because it turns out what a person means or intends is not important. It only matters whether or not some assholes have decided they are offended regardless of obvious intention, etc.

People, this is the kind of shit that STIFLES debate. This is the kind of thing that SHUTS DOWN dialogue. If we want to progress as a people rather than regress, dialogue is essential.

Expand
Collapse

I'm sure I'll catch hell for this, particularly from the SJW's on this board, but this seems like the same BS that is crippling constructive debate and turning us into a nation of whimps more concerned about whether their sensibilities are being honored and protected, regardless of context or intent, than they are about actual substance and dialogue.

From everything I've read on this thing, Shnatter is most certainly not a racist...never once intended to call anyone the "n-word", and was in fact disparaging racist things that he learned in his past.

He had literally set up this conference call to make sure his company learned how to be more sensitive to such things. Even people at the meeting admitted he was decrying terrible racism he knew of from the past. But some on the call got offended that he even uttered the word...never mind it was in the context, not of calling anyone such a thing, but as a quote of what somebody else had said in the past, but not suffered the same attacks he was getting just for blaming the NFL's handling of the "kneeling" BS for negatively impacting his sales.

He gave another example of what used to happen to some black Americans when he was younger. This to emphasize to his team how much things have changed and why it was important to get more training and advice on how to speak publicly.

On top of that....the guy immediately apologizes for even using the word in context because it upset some on the call, and he removes himself as the top exec of his own company, and removes himself from the UofL Board of Trustees, and states publicly how he is opposed to racism, etc.

But that's not good enough. No, the SJW's of the world have to have more blood sacrifice at the alter of their "hurt feelings" or "bruised sensibilities" because it turns out what a person means or intends is not important. It only matters whether or not some assholes have decided they are offended regardless of obvious intention, etc.

People, this is the kind of shit that STIFLES debate. This is the kind of thing that SHUTS DOWN dialogue. If we want to progress as a people rather than regress, dialogue is essential.

And that's why I I getting increasingly sick and tired of this BS!

Rant over.

Click to expand...

Being able to stifle debate and shut down dialogue represents power. People want it and aren't going to give it up willingly.

Expand
Collapse

I'm sure I'll catch hell for this, particularly from the SJW's on this board, but this seems like the same BS that is crippling constructive debate and turning us into a nation of whimps more concerned about whether their sensibilities are being honored and protected, regardless of context or intent, than they are about actual substance and dialogue.

From everything I've read on this thing, Shnatter is most certainly not a racist...never once intended to call anyone the "n-word", and was in fact disparaging racist things that he learned in his past.

He had literally set up this conference call to make sure his company learned how to be more sensitive to such things. Even people at the meeting admitted he was decrying terrible racism he knew of from the past. But some on the call got offended that he even uttered the word...never mind it was in the context, not of calling anyone such a thing, but as a quote of what somebody else had said in the past, but not suffered the same attacks he was getting just for blaming the NFL's handling of the "kneeling" BS for negatively impacting his sales.

He gave another example of what used to happen to some black Americans when he was younger. This to emphasize to his team how much things have changed and why it was important to get more training and advice on how to speak publicly.

On top of that....the guy immediately apologizes for even using the word in context because it upset some on the call, and he removes himself as the top exec of his own company, and removes himself from the UofL Board of Trustees, and states publicly how he is opposed to racism, etc.

But that's not good enough. No, the SJW's of the world have to have more blood sacrifice at the alter of their "hurt feelings" or "bruised sensibilities" because it turns out what a person means or intends is not important. It only matters whether or not some assholes have decided they are offended regardless of obvious intention, etc.

People, this is the kind of shit that STIFLES debate. This is the kind of thing that SHUTS DOWN dialogue. If we want to progress as a people rather than regress, dialogue is essential.

And that's why I am getting increasingly sick and tired of this BS!

Rant over.

Click to expand...

I don't agree with you often, but in this case I do, and I think it was well said.

Expand
Collapse

Being able to stifle debate and shut down dialogue represents power. People want it and aren't going to give it up willingly.

Click to expand...

My concern is, in so doing, they are pushing a lot of people into thinking they have to choose sides and prepare/fight back. If there continues to be this movement of branding people racist who aren't, there is going to be increased resentment from those people and people who sympathize and wonder how in the hell things got so out of control.

We've made so much progress on race relations the past 4+ decades, mostly because most everyone has realized how bad and stupid it is to judge anyone based on the color of their skin alone. And because every year those truly extreme racist assholes from the 60's and before are dying off.

But stop honest discussion and label and/or threaten anyone regardless of whether or not they really deserve it, and you'll start building hate again.

Expand
Collapse

My concern is, in so doing, they are pushing a lot of people into thinking they have to choose sides and prepare/fight back. If there continues to be this movement of branding people racist who aren't, there is going to be increased resentment from those people and people who sympathize and wonder how in the hell things got so out of control.

We've made so much progress on race relations the past 4+ decades, mostly because most everyone has realized how bad and stupid it is to judge anyone based on the color of their skin alone. And because every year those truly extreme racist assholes from the 60's and before are dying off.

But stop honest discussion and label and/or threaten anyone regardless of whether or not they really deserve it, and you'll start building hate again.

Click to expand...

I totally agree I just think there is one side that wants to keep the hate alive.

Expand
Collapse

With social media being how everyone gets their news no one ever looks for context. Its instant reaction to a half baked story

Papa was explaining why he wasnt concerned about potential backlash from withdrawing PJs NFL sponsorship over their handling of the protests. And his point was (parsing here) "Colonel Sanders called blacks ******s and they still bought his chicken. We'll be fine."

Obviously an idiotic way to express that point on a conference call, but, his point about what they should/shouldn't do from a PR standpoint to keep that market share is 100% valid.

That being said, he completely torpedoed it with these comments, which is freaking hilarious.

Either way he donates a ton to UK too. We'll be more than happy to take what he was giving UofL on the downlow.

Expand
Collapse

Agreed Very little tolerance to opposing viewpoints. You either agree 100% to their views or you are wrong and will get attacked.

***EDIT*** And that is from BOTH sides for anyone who wants to make a political opinion out of it.

Click to expand...

I'll take it a step further. I see plenty of tolerance from the right...none from the left. That's not saying anything about who is right and who is wrong on the various issues. Only one side, as far as I can tell, think s it's a good thing to shout down the opposition or even resort to violence (not the individual nut-job stuff, but main-stream large group crap).

Expand
Collapse

I'll take it a step further. I see plenty of tolerance from the right...none from the left. That's not saying anything about who is right and who is wrong on the various issues. Only one side, as far as I can tell, think s it's a good thing to shout down the opposition or even resort to violence (not the individual nut-job stuff, but main-stream large group crap).

Click to expand...

I'm not picking sides, and I edited my post to reflect that. Anything else and this thread ends up in the pit, and I don't want to be the one who de-rails it.

Expand
Collapse

With social media being how everyone gets their news no one ever looks for context. Its instant reaction to a half baked story

Papa was explaining why he wasnt concerned about potential backlash from withdrawing PJs NFL sponsorship over their handling of the protests. And his point was (parsing here) "Colonel Sanders called blacks ******s and they still bought his chicken. We'll be fine."

Obviously an idiotic way to express that point on a conference call, but, his point about what they should/shouldn't do from a PR standpoint to keep that market share is 100% valid.

That being said, he completely torpedoed it with these comments, which is freaking hilarious.

Either way he donates a ton to UK too. We'll be more than happy to take what he was giving UofL on the downlow.

Click to expand...

If that is what he said, it was not well thought out...but what it also was not is racist. Crude, yes...racist, no. Quoting the "n-word" is not the same as using it to describe someone, unless the act of quoting it is itself designed to offer insult. Know what I mean?

Expand
Collapse

I'm not picking sides, and I edited my post to reflect that. Anything else and this thread ends up in the pit, and I don't want to be the one who de-rails it.

Click to expand...

Ain't it a shame we have to be so careful with our words, lest someone get really angry or hurt.

My wife and children are liberal democrats. I'm a conservative. I don't base my decisions on who to like, love or listen to based on their political beliefs, nor do I demand my own kids share my beliefs.

But I can tell you, they, like all of their liberal friends are pretty much incapable of having a dignified, respectful debate or conversation about politics with a conservative. Growing up in California has pretty much guaranteed that.